Coastal flooding could bring $500bn of annual damages to the Asia-Pacific by the year 2100, if countries do not adapt to rising sea levels.

This is according to new research, published in the journal Scientific Reports, which assesses how coastal flooding is impacting the Asia-Pacific region – and models how the damages could worsen as sea level rises over the 21st century. 

The paper finds that coastal flooding is already driving $26.8bn of damage every year across 29 countries in Asia and the Pacific, equivalent to 0.1% of the region’s GDP.

It projects that, under current policies, annual coastal flood damages in the region could rise to $518bn by 2100 – but this could drop to $338bn if warming is capped at 1.5C.

Small island states face the greatest risks from coastal flooding and will continue to bear the brunt of the damage as the planet continues to warm, according to the research.

For example, it finds that Tuvalu will face annual coastal flood damage equivalent to 38% of its GDP by the end of the century.

Meanwhile, small island states such as Kiribati, the Maldives, Micronesia and Tuvalu will permanently lose around 10% of their total land area.

The study’s lead author says the research shows how “rising seas” create “existential” and “economic” risks for low-lying islands in the Asia-Pacific.

He tells Carbon Brief that the paper highlights a “sharp inequality”, as developing nations with little historical responsibility for sea level rise face the brunt of its impacts.

Coastal damage

More than one billion people – about 15% of the world’s population – currently live within 10km of a coast.

Asia is home to some of the largest cities in the world, many of which are located near the sea, such as Mumbai, Tokyo, and Shanghai. The continent is home to 60% of the world’s coastal population.

However, there are hazards to living near the water.

Coastal flooding is caused by a combination of gradually rising sea levels and “episodic extreme sea levels”, such as high tides and storm surges, the study explains.

To assess these two factors, the study combines components including an ocean model and tide-height data.

The authors model flooding in all coastal Pacific and Asian countries that are listed as “developing member countries” by the Asian Development Bank. These 29 countries include Bangladesh, the Philippines and Tuvalu. 

They calculate the economic damage caused by flooding, by combining their flood model with data on land use and “asset values” across the residential, commercial, industrial, infrastructure and agricultural sectors. 

The authors assume when land floods permanently, the “assets” are completely lost. For areas that only flood periodically, the authors use a model linking flood depth to a percentage of land damaged to calculate the economic consequences.

They find that coastal flooding currently drives $27bn of damage every year in the Asia-Pacific.

China and Indonesia bear the greatest damage, each losing more than $6bn every year. The study authors say this is because both countries have “extensive coastlines, large populations in flood-prone areas and critical economic infrastructure concentrated near the coast”.

However, the study finds that small islands face the greatest economic damage as a percentage of their GDP.

The study shows that the five most-severely affected countries are small island states. Vanuatu tops the ranking, losing 1.5% of its GDP to flooding every year. It is followed by Papua New Guinea and Micronesia.

Dr Michalis Vousdoukas is a researcher in coastal geography at the University of the Aegean in Greece and lead author of the study.

He tells Carbon Brief that even these damage estimates are “conservative” as they do not consider indirect economic losses, such as disruption to business, the loss of critical infrastructure, such as airports, or social impacts, such as migration.

Vousdoukas tells Carbon Brief that the study “highlights a sharp inequality between responsibility and impact”, explaining that the “countries that contributed the least to global emissions, particularly atoll nations, face the highest relative damages”.

Island nations in the Asia-Pacific region made of atolls – ring-shaped coral reefs or islands – include Kiribati, the Marshall Islands and Tuvalu.

Exposure

The authors also calculate population exposure to flooding, by overlaying their flood model with world population data.

Vousdoukas explains that “a person is considered exposed if they live in an area that appears as flooded in our model”.

The paper finds that six million people across the Asia-Pacific are currently at risk of coastal flooding each year, accounting for 0.2% of the region’s total population. The paper says:

“Although this may appear to be a small percentage, it still represents millions of individuals and families whose lives and livelihoods are under constant threat.”

Ranjan Panda is the convenor of the Combat Climate Change Network in India. Panda, who was not involved in the study, tells Carbon Brief that sea level rise is already forcing “millions of people to migrate out in distressed conditions to cities and other countries”.

China and Bangladesh rank the highest, with 2.2 million and 1.5 million people, respectively, exposed to coastal flooding each year.

However, small islands have the greatest percentage of their population exposed to flooding. Vanuatu again tops the table, with 2% of its population facing coastal flooding every year, according to the study. It is followed by Micronesia and the Maldives.

Bangladesh is the highest ranking non-island country, due to its “densely populated and flood-prone delta region”, the study finds.

Rising seas

As the climate warms, coastal flooding is worsening.

Average global sea levels have risen by more than 20cm since 1900, driven mainly by the thermal expansion of the ocean and the melting of glaciers and ice sheets.

Global warming is also “supercharging” hurricanes and typhoons, causing storm surges – the temporary rise in sea level that happens during a storm – to become more intense.

The study uses projections from the IPCC’s sixth assessment report to model sea level rise over the 21st century. These include thermal expansion and meltwater from glaciers and ice sheets, but exclude “low-likelihood, high-impact” events, such as ice-sheet collapse.

The authors assess five future scenarios:

• SSP1-1.9: A very-low emissions reductions pathway that “aligns with” the Paris Agreement’s 1.5C limit
• SSP1-2.6: A “low” emissions pathway achieving net-zero emissions after 2050
• SSP2-4.5: A “moderate” emissions scenario, often described as the trajectory under current climate policies. 
• SSP3-7.0: A “high” emissions pathway
• SSP5-8.5: A very-high emissions pathway of “high fossil fuel reliance” throughout the 21st century

They find that, even under the lowest 1.5C warming scenario, countries in the Asia-Pacific will face damages of $338bn due to coastal flooding every year by the end of the century. This accounts for 1.3% of the region’s present-day GDP. (The authors assume no adaptation measures, changes in land use or inflation over the century.)

Under the current policy scenario, annual damage from coastal flooding rises to $518bn by the end of the century.

The chart below shows coastal flood damage as a percentage of annual GDP by the end of the century under the five scenarios for each country. Each horizontal bar shows the damage for one country, with the lowest warming SSP1-1.9 scenario on the left (grey) and highest warming SSP5-8.5 scenario (black) on the right.

The study finds that, by the end of the century, the Pacific island of Tuvalu will face the worst economic consequences from coastal flooding. Even under the 1.5C warming scenario, its annual economic losses due to coastal flooding will reach 38% of its GDP.

The authors also assess the amount of land that will be permanently lost to the sea.

They find that small island states – such as Kiribati, the Maldives, Micronesia and Tuvalu – will experience the highest percentage of their land permanently submerged, each losing around 10% of their total land area.

Two million people currently live in areas of the Asia-Pacific that will be permanently flooded by the end of the century under the 1.5C warming scenario, according to the research.

Finance gap

Countries can reduce the impacts of coastal flooding through adaptation. This can include building flood defenses, making infrastructure more resilient to flooding, or arranging “managed retreat” to move people away from vulnerable areas as the seas encroach.

The study authors model the cost of building defences – such as sea walls, levees, embankments and sand dunes – high enough that the economic damage from coastal flooding over the 21st century does not worsen beyond 2020 levels.

The research highlights that the cost of investing in these defences is substantially lower than the potential economic damages of sea level rise.

The authors estimate that, under a 1.5C warming scenario, building flood defenses to limit flood damage to 2020 levels would cost $9bn in total. However, building these defences would avoid $157bn in damages due to coastal flooding, they find.

Dr Rafael Almar is a researcher at the Laboratory of Space Geophysical and Oceanographic Studies in France and was not involved in the study. He says the study has “significant implications for development banks and financial institutions” as it could help them prioritise investments in “clearly identified hotspots”. 

However, he emphasises that building flood defences “is not the only solution”. For example, he argues that “relocation and renaturalisation” – the process of moving people away from the coast and allowing the area to return to its natural state – can make an area “more resilient”.

Panda also warns that physical flood defenses “could actually be triggering further local environmental crises that accelerate the losses and damages faced by people due to sea level rise and flooding impacts”.

Sea walls have been shown to damage wildlife – for example, blocking animals such as turtles from reaching parts of the beach – according to an article in Climate Home News. The piece adds that physical defenses are “inflexible” and “mainly benefit the rich and encourage risky building near the coast”.

Sourcing money for developing countries to adapt to the impacts of climate change is an ongoing talking point at international climate negotiations. 

A group of developed nations, including much of Europe, the US and Japan, is obliged under the Paris Agreement to provide international “climate finance” to developing countries. This money can be used for both mitigation – reducing emissions to limit warming – and adaptation.

In 2023, developed nations provided $26bn in international adaptation finance to developing nations, according to a recent UN report. This is roughly the amount that Asia-Pacific countries currently lose every year due to coastal flooding alone.

Rapid emissions cuts would avoid 64cm of ‘locked in’ sea level rise by 2300

Oceans

|

24.10.25

Global soil moisture in ‘permanent’ decline due to climate change

Drought

|

27.03.25

Guest post: How ancient ice-age valleys could hold the key to global ice-sheet loss

Guest posts

|

05.10.22

Mapped: African world heritage sites threatened by sea level rise ‘to triple by 2050’

Extreme weather

|

10.02.22

The post Asia-Pacific faces ‘$500bn-a-year’ hit from rising seas if current policies continue appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Asia-Pacific faces ‘$500bn-a-year’ hit from rising seas if current policies continue

Scientists have long known that fires release substantial amounts of greenhouse gases and pollutants into the atmosphere.

However, estimating the total climate impact of fires is challenging.

Now, new satellite data has shed fresh light on the complex interplay between the climate and fires in different landscapes around the world.

It suggests that global emissions from fires are much higher than previously assumed.

In this article, we unpack the latest update to the Global Fire Emissions Database (GFED) – a resource that combines satellite information on fire activity and vegetation to estimate how fires impact the land and atmosphere.

The latest update to the database – explored in new research published in journal Scientific Data – includes data up to and including the year 2024.

It reveals that, once the data from smaller fires is included, fire emissions sit at roughly 3.4bn tonnes of carbon (GtC) annually – significantly higher than previous estimates.

It also shows that carbon emissions from fires have remained stable over the past two to three decades, as rising emissions from forest fires have been offset by a decline in grassland fire emissions.

The database update also illustrates how the amount of area burned around the world each year is falling as expanding agriculture has created a fragmented landscape and new restrictions on crop residue burning have come into force.

Landscape fires

Fire events vary widely in cause, size and intensity. They take place across the globe in many types of landscapes – deserts and ice sheets are the only biomes that are immune to fire.

When vegetation burns, it releases greenhouse gas emissions, which contribute to global warming. It also releases pollutants that cause local air pollution and, on a global scale, have a cooling effect on the climate.

Forest fires often generate considerable media attention, especially when they threaten places where people live. 

However, the forest fires that make the news represent just a small fraction of all fires globally.

More than 95% of the world’s burned area occurs in landscapes with few trees, such as savannahs and grasslands.

Fires have helped maintain tropical savannah ecosystems for millions of years. Savannahs have the perfect conditions for fire: a wet season which allows grasses and other “fuels” to grow, followed by an extended dry season where these fuels become flammable.

Historically, these fires were ignited by lightning. Today, they are mostly caused – intentionally or accidentally – by humans.

And yet, despite their prevalence, these fires receive relatively little media attention. This is not surprising, as they have been part of the landscape for so long and rarely threaten humans, except for their impact on air quality.

Fires also occur in croplands. For example, farmers may use fire to clear agricultural residues after harvest, or during deforestation to clear land for cultivation.

The term “landscape fires” is increasingly used to describe all fires that burn on land – both planned and unplanned.

(The term “wildfire”, on the other hand, covers a subset of landscape fires which are unplanned and typically burn in underdeveloped and underinhabited land.)

Calculating the carbon emissions of landscape fires is important to better understand their impact on local air quality and the global climate.

New data

In principle, calculating carbon emissions from fires is straightforward. The amount of vegetation consumed by fire – or “fuel consumption” – in one representative “unit” of burned area has to be multiplied by the total area burned.

Fuel consumption can be determined through field measurements and satellite analysis.

For example, the burned area of a relatively small fire can be measured by walking around the perimeter with a GPS device. Fuel consumption, meanwhile, can be derived by measuring the difference in amount of vegetation before and after a fire, something that is usually only feasible with planned fires.

In practice, however, fires are unpredictable and highly variable, making accurate measurement difficult.

To track where and when fires occur, researchers rely on satellite observations.

For two decades, NASA’s MODIS satellite sensors have provided a continuous, global record of fire activity. To avoid too many false alarms, the algorithms these satellites use are built in a way so fires are flagged only when they burn an entire 500-metre grid cell. 

However, this approach misses many smaller fires – resulting in conservative estimates of total burned area.

The latest update to the GFED includes, for the first time, finer-resolution satellite data, including from the European Space Agency’s “sentinel missions”.

This data shows that fires too small to be picked up by a satellite with a 500-metre spatial resolution are extremely common. So common, in fact, that they nearly double previous estimates of global burned area. 

The data shows that, on average, 800 hectares of land – an area roughly the size of Australia – has burned annually over the past two decades.

The map below shows the frequency of fires around the world. Regions shaded in dark red burn, on average, 50-100% each year. In other words, fires occur annually or biannually. Regions in dark blue, on the other hand, are those where fires occur, but are very infrequent. Most regions fall in between these extremes.

The map shows that the areas most prone to fire are largely found in the world’s savannah and agricultural regions.

Falling burned area

Over recent decades, the total burned area globally each year has been declining. 

This is largely due to land-use change in regions which used to have frequent fires.

For example, savannah is being converted to croplands in Africa. This transforms a frequently burning land-use type to one that does not burn – and creates a more fragmented landscape with new firebreaks which limit the spread of fire.

The decline in burned area is also due to the introduction of more stringent air quality regulations limiting crop residue burning in much of the world, including the European Union.

The amount of “fuel” – or biomass – in a unit area of land varies greatly. Arid grasslands are biomass-poor and, therefore, produce less carbon emissions when burned, whereas fuel consumption in tropical forests with peat soils is extremely high.

Maps of carbon emissions from fires closely resemble maps of burned area. However, they typically highlight biomass-rich areas, such as dense forests.

This is illustrated in the map below, which shows how fires in regions coloured dark red on the map produce, on average, 1,000-5,000 grams of carbon per square metre. In these places, much more carbon is lost during fires than gained through photosynthesis.

Meanwhile, much of the world’s savannah regions are coloured in yellow and orange on the map, indicating that fires here produce between 100-500 grams of carbon per square metre.

Rising forest fire carbon emissions

The boost in fire emissions captured by the latest version of the GFED is most pronounced in open landscapes, including savannahs, grasslands and shrublands.

Forest fire emissions, on the other hand, have barely changed in the updated version of the database. This is because most forest fires are relatively large and were already well captured by the coarse resolution satellite data used previously.

However, the trend in forest fire emissions is sloping upwards over the study period.

Overall, current estimates – which take into account the new data from smaller fires – suggest that, over 2002-22, global fire emissions averaged 3.4GtC per year.

This is roughly 65% higher than estimates set out in the previous update to the GFED, which was published in 2017. 

For comparison, today’s fossil fuel emissions are around 10GtC per year.

Comparisons between fire and fossil fuel carbon emissions are somewhat flawed, as much of the carbon released by fires is eventually reabsorbed when vegetation regrows.

However, this is not the case for fires linked to deforestation or the burning of tropical peatlands, where regrowth is either much slower – or non-existent, if forests are converted to agriculture. These fires account for roughly 0.4GtC each year – just less than 12% of total fire emissions – and contribute directly to the long-term rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2).

The traditional view of forest fires as “carbon-neutral” is increasingly uncertain as the climate changes due to human activity. Longer fire seasons, drier vegetation and more lightning-induced ignitions are increasing fire frequency in many forested regions. 

This is most apparent in the rapidly-warming boreal forests of the far-northern latitudes. The year 2023 saw the highest emissions ever recorded by satellites in boreal forests, breaking a record set just two years before. 

Moreover, the fires in boreal forests are becoming more intense – meaning they burn hotter and consume a larger fraction of vegetation. This, in turn, jeopardises the recovery of forests. 

In cold areas, fires also cause permafrost to break down faster. This happens because fires remove an organic soil layer that has an insulating effect which prevents permafrost thaw. 

The map below shows the dominant fire type in different regions of the world, including boreal forest fires (dark green), cropland fires (red), open savannah (darker yellow) and woody savannah (brown).

Changing ‘pyrogeography’

Thanks to more precise satellite data we now know that fire emissions are higher than we thought previously, with the new version of GFED having 65% higher overall fire emissions than its predecessor.

However, all evidence suggests that emissions from fires have been stable over the past two to three decades. This is because an increase in forest fire emissions is being offset by a decline in grassland fire emissions.

The world’s changing “pyrogeography” is illustrated in the bar chart below, which breaks down annual fire emissions across different types of biome.

It shows how low-intensity grassland fires with modest fuel consumption – represented in yellow and brown – have declined over time, while high-intensity forest fires – illustrated in green colours – are becoming more prominent, albeit with substantial variability in emissions year-on-year.

UNEP: New country climate plans ‘barely move needle’ on expected warming

Emissions

|

04.11.25

Explainer: How human-caused aerosols are ‘masking’ global warming

GHGs and aerosols

|

10.06.25

Q&A: Why methane levels are rising with no ‘hint of a decline’

Emissions

|

10.09.24

Guest post: Why resolving how land emissions are counted is critical for tracking climate progress

GHGs and aerosols

|

22.11.23

The post Guest post: Why carbon emissions from fires are significantly higher than thought appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Guest post: Why carbon emissions from fires are significantly higher than thought

Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed.
An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.

This week

‘Lukewarm’ end to COP30

BYE BELÉM: The COP30 climate talks in Belém ended last weekend with countries agreeing on a goal to “triple” adaptation finance by 2035 and efforts to “strengthen” climate plans, Climate Home News reported. The final deal “fell short on the global transition away from oil, gas and coal”, the outlet said, as Brazil announced that it would bring forward voluntary roadmaps to phase out fossil fuels and deforestation, before the next COP. It was a “frustrating end” for more than 80 countries who wanted a roadmap away from fossil fuels to be part of the formal COP agreement, BBC News said.

WHAT HAPPENED?: Carbon Brief published its in-depth analysis of all the key outcomes from COP30, spanning everything from negotiations on adaptation, just transition, gender and “Article 6” carbon trading through to a round-up of pledges on various issues. Another Carbon Brief article summed up outcomes around food, forests, land and nature. Also, Carbon Brief journalists discussed the COP in a webinar held earlier this week.

ART OF THE DEAL: The “compromise” COP30 deal – known as the “global mutirão” – “exposed deep rifts over how future climate action should be pursued”, Reuters noted. The “last-ditch” agreement was reached after fossil-fuel wording negotiations between the EU and Saudi Arabia, according to the Guardian. Meanwhile, Carbon Brief revealed the “informal” list of 84 countries said to have “opposed” the inclusion of a fossil-fuel roadmap in the mutirão decision, but analysis of the list exposed contradictions and likely errors.

UNITY, SCIENCE, SENSE: The final agreement received “lukewarm praise”, said the Associated Press. Palau ambassador Ilana Seid, who chaired the coalition of small-island nations, told the newswire: “Given the circumstances of geopolitics today, we’re actually quite pleased…The alternative is that we don’t get a decision and that would have been [worse].” UN climate chief Simon Stiell said that amid “denial, division and geopolitics”, countries “chose unity, science and economic common sense”, reported the Press Trust of India.

Around the world

• Floods and landslides killed more than 200 people in Thailand and Indonesia this week, reported Bloomberg. At least 90 people also died in recent floods in Vietnam, said Al Jazeera.
• New measures to cut energy bills and a “pay-per-mile” electric-vehicle levy were among the announcements in the UK’s budget, said Carbon Brief.
• The Group of 20 (G20) leaders signed off on a declaration “addressing the climate crisis” and other issues, reported Reuters, which had no input from the US who boycotted last week’s G20 summit in South Africa.
• Canadian prime minister Mark Carney signed a deal with the province of Alberta “centred on plans for a new heavy oil pipeline”, said the Guardian, adding that Canadian culture minister and former environment minister, Steven Guilbeault, resigned from cabinet over the deal.
• Greenpeace analysis, covered by Reuters, found that permits for new coal plants in China are “on track to fall to a four-year low” in 2025.

27

The number of hours that COP30 talks went over schedule before ending in Belém last Saturday, making it the 11th-longest UN climate summit on record, according to analysis by Carbon Brief.

Latest climate research

• The risk of night-time deaths during heatwaves increased “significantly” over 2005-15 in sub-Saharan Africa | Science Advances
• Almost half of climate journalists surveyed showed “moderate to severe” symptoms of anxiety | Traumatology
• Lakes experienced “more severe” heatwaves than those in the atmosphere over the past two decades | Communications Earth & Environment

(For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)

Captured

The key COP30 agreement – termed the “global mutirão” – contained 69 inactive verbs, which require no action from countries, compared to 32 active ones. “Recognises”, “recalls” and “acknowledges” were used far more often than more active verbs, such as “decides”, “calls” and “requests”, showed Carbon Brief analysis.

Spotlight

Nine warnings from a UK climate and nature ‘emergency’ briefing

This week, Carbon Brief’s Orla Dwyer reports from an event where experts and campaigners sounded the alarm bell on climate change and nature loss.

Naturalist and broadcaster Chris Packham urged attendees at a climate and nature “emergency briefing” in London yesterday to “listen to the science” on climate change amid a “dangerous wave of misinformation and lies”.

The “first-of-its-kind” event heard from nine experts on the links between climate change, nature loss, health, food production, economics and national security.

Event host, Prof Mike Berners-Lee from Lancaster University, called for a “World War II level of leadership” to tackle the interconnected crises.

Hundreds of people showed up, including Green Party, Labour and Liberal Democrat MPs, leader of the Greens Zack Polanski, musician Brian Eno and actress Olivia Williams.

Here is a snapshot of what the nine speakers said in their short, but stark, presentations.

Prof Kevin Anderson, professor of energy at University of Manchester

Anderson focused on the risks of a warmer world and the sliver of emissions left in the global carbon budget, noting:

“We have to eliminate fossil fuels or temperatures will just keep going up.”

He urged a “Marshall-style” plan – referencing the 1948 post-war US plan to rebuild Europe – to ramp up actions on retrofitting, public transport and electrification.

Prof Nathalie Seddon, professor of biodiversity at University of Oxford

Nature is not a “nice to have”, but rather “critical national infrastructure”, Seddon told attendees. She called for the “need to create an economy that values nature”.

Prof Paul Behrens, British Academy global professor at University of Oxford

Behrens discussed the food security risks from climate change. Impacts such as poor harvests and food price inflation are “barely acknowledge[d]” in agricultural policy, he said.

He also emphasised the “unsustainable” land use of animal agriculture, which “occupies around 85% of total agricultural land” in the UK.

Prof Tim Lenton, chair in climate change and Earth system science at Exeter University

Lenton outlined the “plenty” of evidence that parts of the Earth system are hurtling towards climate tipping points that could push them irreversibly into a new state.

He discussed the possibility of the shutdown of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, which he said could cause -20C winters in London. He also noted positive tipping points, such as momentum that led the UK to stop burning coal for electricity last year.

Prof Hayley Fowler, professor of climate change impacts at Newcastle University

One in four properties in England could be at risk of flooding by 2050, Fowler said, and winters are getting wetter.

She discussed extreme weather risks and listed the impacts of floods in recent years in Germany, Spain and Libya, adding:

“These events are not warnings of what might happen in the future. They’re actually examples of what is happening right now.”

Angela Francis, director of policy solutions at WWF-UK

Francis factchecked several claims made against climate action, such as the high cost of achieving net-zero.

She noted that the estimated cost for the UK to achieve net-zero is about £4bn per year, which is less than 0.2% of GDP.

Lieutenant general Richard Nugee, climate and security advisor

Discussing the risks climate change poses to national security, Nugee said:

“Climate change can be thought of as a threat multiplier, making existing threats worse or more frequent and introducing new threats. Climate shocks fuel global instability.”

Tessa Khan, environmental lawyer and executive director of Uplift

Khan said the rising cost of energy in the UK is “turning into a significant political risk for the energy transition”.

She discussed the cost of fossil-fuel dependency and the fact that these fuels cost money to burn, but renewable “input[s], sun or wind [are] free forever”.

Prof Hugh Montgomery, professor of intensive care medicine at University College London

Montgomery discussed the health and economic benefits of climate actions, such as eating less meat and using more public transport, noting:

“The climate emergency is a health emergency – and it’s about time we started treating it as one.”

Watch, read, listen

WATER WORRIES: ABC News spoke to three Iranian women about the impacts of Tehran’s water crisis amid the “worst drought in 60 years”.

CLIMATE EFFORT: The BBC’s Climate Question podcast looked at the main outcomes from COP30 and discussed the “future of climate action” with a team of panelists.

CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR:New Scientist interviewed criminal psychologist Julia Shaw about the psychology behind environmental crimes.

Coming up

• 24 November-5 December: COP20 on international trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora, Samarkand, Uzbekistan
• 29-30 November: First part of global youth environment assembly, Nairobi, Kenya
• 3-4 December: Second round of Egyptian parliamentary elections
• 5 December: World soil day, global

Pick of the jobs

• Aldersgate Group, head of policy | Salary: £56,650-£66,950 per year. Location: London
• Ofgem, climate resilience expert | Salary: £61,446-£86,547. Location: Cardiff, Glasgow or London
• Green Climate Fund, integrity risk management lead | Salary: $171,200. Location: Incheon, South Korea
• Isles of Scilly Wildlife Trust, project manager – seabird recovery | Salary: Up to £45,000 per year. Location: Isles of Scilly, UK

DeBriefed is edited by Daisy Dunne. Please send any tips or feedback to debriefed@carbonbrief.org.

This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s weekly DeBriefed email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.

COP30 DeBriefed 21 November 2025: ‘Mutirão’ text latest; ‘Roadmaps’ explained; COP finish times plotted

COP30 Belém

|

21.11.25

COP30 DeBriefed 14 November 2025: Finance and 1.5C loom large at talks; China’s emissions dip; Negotiations explained

COP30 Belém

|

14.11.25

DeBriefed 7 November 2025: Leaders descend on Belém; UN warns of 1.5C breach; changing roles of climate scientists

DeBriefed

|

07.11.25

DeBriefed 31 October 2025: Hurricane Melissa strikes Jamaica; Climate plans overshoot 1.5C; Protest crackdowns

DeBriefed

|

31.10.25

The post DeBriefed 28 November 2025: COP30’s ‘frustrating’ end; Asia floods; UK ‘emergency’ climate event appeared first on Carbon Brief.

DeBriefed 28 November 2025: COP30’s ‘frustrating’ end; Asia floods; UK ‘emergency’ climate event